With the Debt Ceiling Deal, America Has Been Played

August 3, 2011 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (19)

Oh what a tangled web we weave…

The deal is done. The House passed it, the Senate passed it and the president signed it. Done deal, debt ceiling raised. So, we can all sigh a huge relief right? Er, not really.

Just look at Wall Street yesterday. The Dow Jones closed down, again. The international community was sickened by the circus they saw the U.S. government enter into for this deal; and the country is divided over whether it's happy with the outcome.

What we do know is America is happy something was done on a bipartisan level. And that's where the happiness ends. [See a collection of political cartoons on the budget and deficit.]

What we do know is the Republicans don't really want more cuts, for if they did they would've embraced the president's original plan which would have reduced the deficit by nearly double the very plan they voted in favor of.

We do know the Tea Party holds more than just a checkbook when it comes to Republicans and yes, I'm talking about a body part here.

We do know that every party is now even more divided, fragmented than before. The Republicans can't decide if they want more spending cuts or if they just want to try to make the president a one term leader. The Democrats feel like they've been thrown under a bus, and regardless of their anger over no increased revenues in this plan, many voted for it. And the Tea Party? A movement within the Republican Party, (obviously they don't have the guts to be a party); well, their approval rating has steadily dropped since March, and it seems the only people that bow down to their demands, despite their being a minority, are House Republicans. [Check out political cartoons about the Tea Party.]

And lastly, there is the president, who I feel showed his hand when he told the American people (and the right wing of Congress was listening): 'I won't invoke the 14th amendment to raise this debt ceiling.' Mr. President, stay away from the poker table please! In doing this, the president backed himself into a corner, cutting a deal with Republicans that was clearly in their favor: entitlements may be cut, but tax revenues were ignored. The bottom line is a Democratic president signed an agreement which will stop those unemployed from receiving their extended benefits while continuing to give tax credits to the rich; the rich who pocket the money and have not (nor will they now or ever) use it to stimulate the economy or to create jobs. [See a collection of political cartoons on the economy.]

A Democrat, imagine.

I am hoping someday I can look back upon this and think the president had an ace up his sleeve; but for now, I see that he bent over for Republicans in an attempt to gain independent votes and in doing so, perhaps lost as many liberal Democratic votes as the votes he gained.

Even sadder is that this is not over. This circus, this nightmare has just begun. Round two is right around the holidays; when medical providers can look forward to more cuts and seniors can look forward to lining up on sidewalks outside of emergency rooms to find someone, anyone to treat them if a deal can't be done. And with these guys in Washington? A deal can't be done.

Call me a pessimist, I'd rather be called realistic. Anyway you look at this, in my opinion, we've been had America.

Tags:
Democratic Party,
Obama administration,
debt,
deficit and national debt,
Republican Party,
Barack Obama

Reader Comments Read all comments (19)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

You're not listening to me. I never said we can spend our way out of this recession. I don't think we can. We have too much debt already. I agree we need cuts and a balanced budget. However, I don't believe further tax cuts will help economic growth when the top earners and companies are sitting on the largest stockpile of cash in recent history. They have the money to higher employees and invest; Apple has more money then the federal government. How would giving them more money cause them to invest then?

Also, the majority of reports show that one of the largest contributors to the recent deficit fiasco is the bush tax cuts. Maybe they produced an over inflated bull market, but they didn't produce a revenue increase nor substantial job growth. They actually produced a deficit along with one of the worst job creation records in our history. This comes directly from the CBO, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Federal Reserve board, and the U.S. Treasury. A bullish market doesn't always equal a healthy economy.

Also massive spending to ramp up and support world war 2 was one of the major factors that pulled us out of the great depression. So yes, spending in certain cases, can produce economic activity. Money the government invests in products, which by the way the US government is the largest consumer in the world, creates demand which in turn creates jobs. again though, I don't believe deficit spending is the way to get out of this recession because we have to large of a deficit already. The only difference between you and I is I believe tax reform also needs to be part of the debt reduction plans.

By the way, there aren't universal rules that are exceptions. The laws of quantum mechanics states the very opposite.

Also, I'm unsure why mentioning one economists would make me a liberal. It's academically healthy to listen to multiple perspectives. Sorry if doing so questions your rigid ideological beliefs, but I believe in informed academic discourse, which listens to multiple perspectives before coming to conclusions.

Lastly, I apologize if I offended you. I actually am enjoying this discussion. The reason I've pointed at the tea party though is because they are the party who were willing to hold the countries possible economic future hostage and ignore the voice of the people who wanted compromise to get their way. The democrats compromised, there were house republicans willing to compromise, but the tea party wouldn't. Instead we got a smaller debt reduction all in the name of no tax reforms at all.

l3lessed of CA 1:41PM August 04, 2011

Tax cuts worked in 20's, Kennedy, Reagan, Newt's tax cuts under Clinton and of course Bush. A note Heritage gives warning on this subject saying OVERSPENDING MAKES MATTERS WORSE. So does layers of taxes. Basically what obama has done is bad.

Business wants stability and know the rules. obamacare hurts companies, thus they try to cut employees, not start up businesses.

There are "universal rules" with exceptions.

Laffer Curve does have it's apex and then dwindling rewards in increased revenue. However we went through one of the longest Bull Markets thanks to tax cuts for rich. Noting tax breaks was given to lower levels as well. Clinton's bad housing plan and bad paper being sold to Wall Street gave up our recession. Of course that is short version. Point is Bush warned of this first year in office.

This will be our last conversation if you continue making remarks about TEA without giving good reasons. Such remarks can get you labeled a liberal. Such as :

Mentioning Paul Krugman and saying "That is why it is important to have mature conversations, which is far from what is happening with the tea party"...

Bill Hedges of MO 6:31AM August 04, 2011

Unsure why my other post got removed, but I'll make this one short.

First off, I'm not a liberal. I don't believe in a large government that supports those who refuse to be productive. I don't believe in ridiculous tax rates. I want the smallest and most efficient government possible.

You labeling me liberal is one of the many rhetorical problems with the political process these days. Instead of listening to other's and having a respectful intelligent conversation where we learn from each other, you label me liberal and write me off.

Now to your argument about tax reductions always equal tax revenue increase. First off, there is no rule in existence that can be applied universally and always return the same results. Your statement is no different. The very theory behind your argument is the Laffer Curve which, if you research it, states that there is a optimal tax rate to get revenue return. We have hit that tax rate and have continued to cut taxes not giving us any real tax revenue in return.

Also there is the reverse Laffer Curve, proposed by nobel prize winner Paul Krugman, which argues that there are times in which cutting government spending actually causes a decrease in revenue.

Again, there is no universal rule. That is why it is important to have mature conversations, which is far from what is happening with the tea party.

l3lessed of CA 11:05PM August 03, 2011

Leslie Marshall

Leslie Marshall

Leslie Marshall is a nationally syndicated radio host heard nationwide weekdays from 7-10pm Eastern time on radio and streamed live at www.lesliemarshallshow.com. Leslie is also a Fox News contributor seen weekly on The O'Reilly Factor, America Live, monthly on Hannity and she sits in for Bob Beckel as one of the co hosts on The Five. She lives in Los Angeles.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

An End to the NRA’s Angry Swagger

Polls show that overwhelming majorities of Americans, and even of NRA members, favor universal background checks.

Mary Kate Cary

Washington’s Toxic Stew

President Obama's burgeoning problems affect more than this week’s three scandals.

Latest Videos

advertisement